June 3, 2005
NOT EXACTLY THE DEAL OF THE CENTURY:
A shaky filibuster deal (Mike Rosen, June 3, 2005, Rocky Mountain News)
It's no surprise that these wavering Republicans were lauded in the dominant liberal media as great compromisers. Media liberals don't want conservative justices on the federal bench any more than Senate Democrats do. Personally, I suspect their celebration is premature. If Senate Democrats honor the spirit of the compromise, they won't block reasonable nominees with a filibuster. (Since they've now agreed to allow a vote on Judges Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown, these must be reasonable nominees. If that's the standard, Senate Democrats will be hard pressed to declare other nominees "extraordinary" simply because they're conservative.) In that case, there won't be any Democratic filibusters, which will be fine with Senate Republicans.I'm not holding my breath on that outcome. The greater likelihood is that the deal won't hold up. That it'll only postpone the inevitable showdown. For Senate Democrats, the battle over circuit court nominees is the under card. The main event is the Supreme Court. The last Supreme Court justice confirmed under a Republican president was Clarence Thomas (who wasn't filibustered, by the way.) Democrats don't want something like that to happen again. The prospect of someone like Judge Janice Rogers Brown, a black conservative woman, making her way to the Supreme Court petrifies them as a threat to their coalition, peeling off traditional Democratic voters to Republicans.
Of the Republican defectors, Sens. Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Lincoln Chafee are liberals. John McCain is a free agent with his own agenda who relishes his role as the favorite Republican of media liberals. These were never reliable votes to break the Democratic logjam.
That leaves John Warner, Mike DeWine and Lindsey Graham, who are nominally conservative. If Senate Democrats renege on their deal and invoke the "extraordinary circumstances" option cavalierly to filibuster reasonable nominees, Warner, DeWine and Graham have intimated that the compromise will be void and that they'll be free to support the revision of Rule XXII.
We'll see how it turns out.
Nothing lost, much gained. Posted by Orrin Judd at June 3, 2005 6:05 AM
"nominally conservative" indeed; nominally in office is their next step.
Posted by: cjm at June 3, 2005 11:16 AMI'm starting to come to the conclusion that this "pathetic compromise" was actually a bit of politcal genius. (Hmmm, wouldn't be the first time that Dems thought they rolled Dubya by making him compromise but then noticed that he'd just ran off with their lunch and underwear.)
Everyone---from Bill Quick on down---knew that the Dems would renege at the first opportunity. (Think maybe Frist, Bush, and Rove figured that out, too?)
But now, when the Dems try to a filibuster on any the new judges or a SC judge, Frist and Co. can say, "Hey, we had a deal, they broke it, now the deal's off and we're going to settle the judicial filibuster rule once and for all."
The Dems put themselves in a precarious situation with their clever manoevering--maybe they should bop over to www.suntzu.com and read up a little bit. Now when they break the compromise, it's no longer the Repubs that are unilaterally trying to change the Senate rules. No, now it's the Dems who are the dirty ones.
Posted by: fred at June 3, 2005 1:35 PMi will believe when i see it ('it' being bill frist's spine).
Posted by: cjm at June 3, 2005 2:16 PM